Flersporede samtaler og hvordan de skabes

Authors

  • Liv Moeslund Ahlgren Aarhus University
  • Thea Helene Nørgaard Aarhus University
  • Hannah Fedder Williams Aarhus University

Keywords:

conversation analysis, schisming, contextualization, intersubjectivity

Abstract

It is a well-known phenomenon that participants orient to several things, people or topics within conversations. Sometimes, this can develop into what Maria Egbert (1993) calls schisming, namely when a single conversation diverges into several conversations that are not necessarily dependent on each other. This paper takes a conversation analytic approach to showing how some participants in a conversation (three members of a study group in this case) can create and take part in two different conversations, which are both dependent on the main conversation. Furthermore, it shows that participants create these subordinate conversations through intersubjective processes and contextualization of their roles and relationships. Lastly, it suggests and discusses a new phenomenon similar to the notion of schisming that we call primary and secondary conversational tracks/sequences, and how it can be further investigated in talk in interaction.

References

Auer, P. (1992). Introduction: John Gumperz’ Approach to Contextualization. I P. Auer & A. Di Luzio The contextualization of language. 1-37. Amsterdam, Philadelphia Pa.: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Berger, E. & S.P. Doehler. (2015). Direct reported speech in storytellings: Enacting and negotiating epistemic entitlements. Text & Talk 35(6). 789–813.
Egbert, M. M. (1993). Schisming – The Transformation from a Single Conversation to Multiple Conversations. Los Angeles: University of California dissertation.
Egbert, M. M. (1997). Schisming: The collaborative transformation from a single conversation to multiple conversations. Research on Language and Social Interaction 30. 1-51.
Goodwin, C. (1979). The Interactive Construction of a Sentence in Natural Conversation. I G. Psathas (red.) Everyday Language Studies in Ethnomethodology. 97-121.
Goodwin, C. & M. H. Goodwin. (1992). Context, Activity and Participation. I P. Auer &A. Di Luzio (red.), The contextualization of language. 77-100. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hepburn, A. & G. B. Bolden. (2013). The conversation analytic approach to transcription. I T. Stivers & J. Sidnell (red.), The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. 57-76. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hoey, E. M. & Kendrick, K. H. (2017). Conversation Analysis. I A. M. B. de Groot & P. Hagoort (red.), Research Methods in Psycholinguistics: A Practical Guide. Wiley Blackwell.
Holt, E. (2013). There’s many a true word said in jest: Seriousness and non-seriousness in interaction. I P. Glenn & E. Holt (red.), Studies of Laughter in Interaction. 69-91. London: Bloomsbury.
Jefferson. G. (1972). Side sequences. I D. Sudnow (red.), Studies in social interaction. 294-338. New York: Free Press.
Jefferson, G. (1979). A technique for inviting laughter and its subsequent acceptance ⁄ declination. I G. Psathas (red.) Everyday language: studies in ethnomethodology 79–96. New York: Irvington.
Jefferson, G. (1993). Caveat speaker: Preliminary notes on recipient topic-shift implicature. Research on Language and Social Interaction 26(1). 1-30.
Mondada, L. (2013). Conventions for multimodal transcription. Flere oplysninger er ikke tilgængelige. Kan tilgås her: https://franzoesistik.philhist.unibas.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/ franzoesistik/mondada_multimodal_conventions.pdf (sidst besøgt 23/1 2019).
Pomerantz, A. & B. J. Fehr. (1997). Conversation analysis: an approach to the study of social action as sense making practices. I T. A. van Dijk (red.), Discourse as social interaction: Discourse Studies 2. 64-91. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Gail Jefferson. (1974). A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation. Language 50 (4). 696-735.
Schegloff, E. A. (1991). Conversation Analysis and Socially Shared Cognition. I L.B. Resnick, J. Levine & S.D. Teasley (red.), Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. 150-171. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. American Psychological Association.
Schegloff, E. A. (2001). Getting serious: joke → serious ‘no’. Journal of Pragmatics 33(12). 1947-1955.
Sidnell, J. (2014). The architecture of intersubjectivity revisited. I: N.J. Enfield, P.K. & J. Sidnell (red.), The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Anthropology. 364-399. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steensig, J. (2012). Conversation Analysis and Affiliation and Alignment. I K. Mortensen & J. Wagner (red.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics: Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Wiley-Blackwell.

Downloads

Published

2019-09-02

How to Cite

Ahlgren, L. M., Nørgaard, T. H., & Williams, H. F. (2019). Flersporede samtaler og hvordan de skabes. Journal of Language Works - Sprogvidenskabeligt Studentertidsskrift, 4(1), 54–66. Retrieved from https://tidsskrift.dk/lwo/article/view/115712

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 1 (2019): Language Works 4(1)

Section

Articles

License

The author/the authors hold the rigths to articles presented in the journal. The author/the authors are granted the right to reproduce their article as they see fit, if they mention LWorks as the original publisher of the article.